Wednesday, October 1, 2008

Secretary Hull responds to the Munich Agreement

The Munich Agreement has been hailed in Great Britain as "Peace for out Time" and has been respected by the French and Italians. There is no doubt the Germans are over the moon about it and that Czechoslovakia despises it. As for the United States, the reaction has been one of cautious optimism and concern for a near future of warfare. Secretary Hull released this statement:

"As to immediate peace results, it is unnecessary to say that the afford a universal sense of relief. I am not undertaking to pass upon the merits of the differences to which the Four-Power Pact signed Munich on yesterday related. It is hoped that in any event the forces which stand for the principles governing peaceful and orderly international relations and their proper application should not relax, but redouble, their efforts to maintain these principles of order under law resting on a sound economic foundation."

Reactions in Great Britain to the Munich Agreement

After the return of the Prime Minister and news of the Agreement reached in Munich, there has been an air of jubilation throughout the British Empire. Lauds are being made at the honor of Great Britain, France, Italy and even Germany. The Lord Mayor of the Welsh city of Cardiff, O. C. Purnell has ordered that the flags of Italy, France and even the Swastika be flown over the city to honor these nations.

In spite of the joy that is in the air after the momentous event, there are detractors. The First Lord of the Admiralty Alfred Duff Cooper, 1st Viscount Norwich has resigned from his position due to the Munich Agreement. He criticised the Prime Minister for employing an Appeasement policy which is just as a effective as losing a war.

The King has accepted the resignation and noted that despite his acceptance of the resignation that he had enormous respect for Lord Cooper for standing by his convictions but that he is unable to agree with them.

It might seem churlish to express any doubts about the Munich agreement, given this tremendous outpouring of gratitude and relief. But doubts there are. Of course, having accepted, under enormous pressure, the terms of an agreement dismembering their country that they were not party to, the Czechs are none too happy about it: there have been massive protests in the streets of Prague. (The authorities had to blackout the streets in order to get them to disperse).

In Britain, Sir Norman Angell calls the agreement a ‘disgraceful sacrifice of innocent third parties’ and Robert Boothby, Conservative MP, calls it a victory for force. Sinclair, leader of the Liberals, says that ‘if war has been averted, peace has not yet been established’. For Leo Amery, the respite from war might be only brief, and should be used to bring in national service at once. The leader-writer of the Manchester Guardian admits that even if a war had been fought, there was no way that Czechoslovakia’s borders could remain as they were. But it remains to be seen whether Hitler is sincere in his desire for peaceful territorial revisions. And nobody who reads the terms carefully ‘can feel other than unhappy’, so harsh are they.

The London correspondent says that ‘At first it seemed like Armistice Day. The resemblance soon passed, but it is peace, however high the price and whoever has had to pay it’. The ARP and defence measures already taken are to remain in place, but nothing further will be done for now. Boxes for gas masks are to be procured and distributed, however! And Poland still wants Teschen, and it seems Czechoslovakia is unwilling to give it up.

Mussolini has also extended an invitation to Chamberlain to visit Rome. It is believed that similar accords can be made between the British Empire and the Fascist Italian State.